This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: ftp way quicker than cp?
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
> Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>
> > You are not really measuring the time needed for "cp". You are
> > measuring the overhead of SMB share access. Using ftp bypasses all
> > this mechanism completely, and sends files directly over the network.
> > Try comparing the time it takes to copy the file in Windows Explorer
> > to the SMB share and to an FTP location -- you'll probably see the
> > same results.
>
> I was aware that there is SMB overhead - just didn't think it would be
> that great!
Well, if you compared a cp to a local directory with ftp to localhost,
you'd get another datapoint...
> (BTW: How exactly do you get the time command working in conjuntion with
> a "copy the file in the Windows Explorer"! :-) )
Umm, have people forgotten already about the good ol' "wallclock time"? ;-)
Sometimes the old methods are still the best [*].
> > IOW, this is not really Cygwin-related.
>
> This is true if such large overhead is only attributable to SMB.
Well, that's what the experiment is for... Alternatively, compare a
non-Cygwin ftp with a "copy" from cmd.exe (although that may skew the
comparison a bit if the ftp implementation is not too efficient).
Igor
[*] Of course, I wouldn't mind at all if someone shows how to
programmatically measure time-to-copy in Windows Explorer...
--
http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
|\ _,,,---,,_ pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ igor@watson.ibm.com
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
"I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route
to the bathroom is a major career booster." -- Patrick Naughton
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/